Death of a guru

Sci-fi writer leaves a legacy … but what?

Recently, news reports told of the death of the hugely popular science fiction writer
Sir Arthur C. Clarke (1917–2008). So famous is Clarke—the author of
some 80 books—that his popularity extended into many non-English speaking
countries. This demonstrates the enormous popularity of science-fiction as it carries
universal themes such as the hope and vision of a more ‘enlightened’
and peaceful future. Indeed, one of Clarke’s enduring themes was for a world
free of religious ideology, and he saw creationists, in particular, as irrational
bigots, and they often came in for criticism from him. He once said:

‘I have encountered a few creationists and because they were usually nice,
intelligent people, I have been unable to decide whether they were really mad, or
only pretending to be mad. If I was a religious person, I would consider creationism
nothing less than blasphemy. Do its adherents imagine that God is a cosmic hoaxer
who has created that whole vast fossil record for the sole purpose of misleading
mankind?’1

As brilliant as he may have been regarded by his legion of fans, this demonstrates
that he held to no more than an ignorant parody of what creationists actually believe.
In short, he is really saying that anyone who believes in creation is stupid. For
such a talented man this comment was really a poor show. I am certainly not trying
to disparage Clarke on the event of his untimely death, but the blogs are already
lauding his legacy. I am trying to highlight that Clarke’s own disparaging
words about creationists will no doubt be rolled out and taken as ‘gospel’,
as he is eulogized all over the world due to many being swept up in the tide
of emotion.

Clarke’s comment about the fossil record was unfortunately ‘willingly
ignorant’ (2 Peter 3:5) about
what the fossil layers actually represent from a creationist perspective.
The overwhelming evidence of catastrophically formed geologic, fossil-bearing layers
is a key to understanding a Christian’s Bible-centered worldview. Clarke was
not alone in his ignorance. Many are very surprised to discover that Christians actually
have answers to such
non-existent problems. Not bothering to find out what people really believe before
criticizing them is really a form of bigotry in itself—the very thing Clarke
accuses Christians of.

Why so popular?

Arthur C. Clarke was regarded as one of the ‘big 3’ in
science fiction along with Robert A. Heinlein and Isaac Asimov. Asimov and
Clarke are two of the most influential authors of our time, and I don’t just
mean in science fiction. Clarke’s writings have had a major influence on people’s
thinking particularly as to whether we are alone in the universe. In interviews,
Clarke consistently expressed his
wish for evidence of extraterrestrial life. A comment from a devotee’s
website said:

‘At the heart of every Arthur C. Clarke novel lies a small puzzle with large
ramifications. He is an author who takes an idea and drops it into a quiet pool
of thought. There’s a splash—that’s the intriguing nature of Clarke’s
scientific genius … He’s a science fiction writer whose imaginings reverberate
outside the realm of fiction.’2

Whether in movies or in print, sci-fi is unquestionably the most popular entertainment
genre of today, and many devotees aspire to the ideals of their sci-fi authors whom
they often regard as visionaries. His most well-known work was the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). This movie (which he co-wrote with
famous movie director Stanley Kubrick) was based upon Clarke’s short story
The Sentinel. Later, Clarke wrote a followup to 2001 called 2010:
Odyssey Two, which was also produced as the movie 2010: The Year We Make Contact.
Both movies presented an antibiblical view of man’s origins. It was the idea
that intelligent aliens, who
must have evolved elsewhere, had seeded evolution on earth, and were somehow engineering or overseeing it for millions of years. The former idea is known as ‘directed panspermia’,
and it, often along with the 'overseeing' notion, is an increasingly popular view among scientists and laypeople alike, in
the main due to the complex information discovered in the DNA molecule of every
living creature (see Designed
by aliens) that could not have evolved by chance.

One of the allures of science fiction is that it taps into mankind’s fascination
with the future.

Of course, this begs the problem of who created our alien creators, and in turn,
the creator of the creators and so on? These are materialistic notions that life
must be evolving all over the universe and must also be at different stages of evolution.
And because there is also a concomitant view that the universe is billions of years
old, then some alien races are presumed to be more advanced, or some less so, and
thus, more primitive at any given time.

One of the allures of science fiction is that it taps into mankind’s fascination
with the future. Clarke was most certainly a futurist and an avid inventor. His
prediction of a moon landing before the year 2000 was dismissed as nonsense when
it was made back in the 1940s.

‘When Neil Armstrong landed in 1969, the United States said that Clarke “provided
the intellectual drive that led us to the moon.”’3

Photo: Wikipedia.org

His most famous prediction was the concept of satellites that now orbit our planet.
Prior to satellites, radio transmissions had a ‘line of sight’ problem
as few bandwidths of radio waves could be sent around the curvature of the earth with reliable consistency (see Created to spread the Gospel).
Satellites are now used as transmitters for radio and television signals
as they are beamed up and then back down to numerous locations. He made this prediction
back in 1945, long before the first space launch, and because of this foresight,
he is known as the father of modern satellites. Due to the incredible impact of
satellites on our everyday lives, Sir Arthur C. Clarke has been held in almost God-like
status by many. He also predicted that giant space elevators will be built that would
reach from the ground to space stations orbiting above. Patrick Moore, the renowned
British astronomer and fellow atheistic anticreationist said, upon hearing of Clarke’s
death:

‘He was ahead of his time in so many ways, … . Quite apart from artificial
satellites there were other things too. A great science fiction writer, a very good
scientist, a great prophet and a very dear friend, I'm very, very sad that he's
gone.’4

Moore has unwittingly stated why such science fiction writers are held in great
esteem. Futurism has religious significance for just about everyone. As Christians
we also believe what we believe, in some part, because of the hope for a better
future—an eternal paradise—with no more sin and death. For those with
no religious affiliation, such sci-fi writers and scientists have become modern-day
prophets, and science has become mankind’s ‘god’. I and many other
Christians enjoy science fiction but understand that it is mere fiction/fantasy
because of our Christian worldview filter. Unfortunately,
most science fiction today deals with the concept of extraterrestrial life,
and therefore it reinforces the notion that evolution must be true.

It is a sad legacy

But Clarke was indeed religious
in the same way that most evolutionists are religious. Early in his life
he explored the paranormal and the metaphysical, and it is believed that this influenced
his novel Childhood's End. He also admitted being taken in by infamous
‘spoon-bender’ Uri Geller’s demonstrations.5 Although he distanced himself from this later in
his life, he still advocated research into telekinesis.

We need to remember that atheism,
by definition, is actually a religious view. The word ‘religion’ comes
from the Latin religare (re: back, ligare: to bind),
expressing the idea that one is ‘bound’ to one’s beliefs, which
guide all of one’s actions. Religion can therefore include the belief that
there is no supernatural realm.6

Sir Arthur has left specific written instructions that his funeral is to be strictly
secular:

'Absolutely no religious rites of any kind, relating to any religious faith, should
be associated with my funeral.’7

Even in his death, Clarke tries to be an example for a totally man-centered worldview

Even in his death, Clarke tries to be an example for a totally man-centered worldview,
which, sadly, will ultimately lead many to a godless eternity. The Bible tells us
that man was made in the image of the eternal God, but is afflicted by sin. Left
to our own devices, destruction usually follows. History has repeatedly shown this
to be true. Man does not learn from history very well because our sin nature with
its selfish desires ultimately takes over.

The Good News though
is that God recognized our inability to help ourselves. Because of His love for
human beings that He created, He sent His One and only Son to die in our place—for
our sins.

In the truest sense Sir Arthur C. Clarke was not a prophet. He was in error about
some of his predictions and time will tell if others come to pass. A true prophet
is one who receives information from God about the future. The prophet's predictions are always 100%
accurate because the information comes from God who inhabits eternity, where there
is no time. It's not surprising therefore that God can tell the future. Only the Creator as shown in the
book of Genesis can have the power to save us. Idealistic hopes provide an uncertain
future, but the Creator makes a promise that I personally know very well.

‘But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners,
Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would
believe on him and receive eternal life’ (1 Timothy 1:16).

Published: 25 March 2008(GMT+10)

We support belief in an intelligent designer—the God of the Bible. This site was also ‘intelligently designed’. But rather than six days, it’s taken thousands of days. Help us design more information for this site. Support this site